Random question xyz wrote:
objection, relevance wrote:
Random question xyz wrote:
Monaco 2015. Pre spike. You’re telling me all these guys INCLUDING FARAH would’ve broken 3:26.00 with the spikes?????? No chance
1. Asbel KIPROP KEN 89 3:26.69 WL, PB
2. Taoufik MAKHLOUFI ALG 88 3:28.75 PB
3. Abdelaati IGUIDER MAR 87 3:28.79 PB
4. Mo FARAH GBR 83 3:28.93 SB
Not a great example. The first athlete was busted for EPO use and the next 3 have all been somewhat implicated for doping.
The new spikes have been around since 2019, and there were some ridiculous performances in the Worlds that year by Nike athletes.
Doping is irrelevant. If the “super spikes” are actually worth ~1 second per lap, four men would’ve broken the world record in Monaco in 2015 had they been wearing them. I guess you don’t like the example because it highlights how ridiculous the shoe hype is.
Then don’t wear them. Prove us wrong. Fact of the matter is no one already wearing them will stop. Why? Because they know they’ll be at a disadvantage. I’ve seen races wear every single athlete was wearing a nike super spike. The athletes know that they’ll run faster in them. The two Oregon guys who ran 3:50 indoors aren’t 3:50 milers in a different shoe. So how did they run 3:50? Forget that they ran faster indoor than any other American ever (except 1).
I think I’m going to cut 20 seconds of my 10k time and tell people that’s my pr because that’s what it would be in the new shoes. When they call me out I’ll tell them “super shoe converted.” They’ll understand.
Nobody is disputing that these new spikes are superior. We are disputing that they give you MULTIPLE SECONDS over 1500m. That is ridiculous, and something we haven't seen duplicated in the pro ranks.
Do the Nike Victories give you multiple seconds over something like the Jasari? If it's not the same thing, why did everyone switch to Victories then?
Again, marginal improvements. VERY marginal.
Aren’t the victories a super shoe? I don’t know. Nike got so many shoes out it’s hard to know other than the dragonfly’s. But I think they’re the same as the dragonfly’s.
If you’re a 3:55 miler and shoes are allowing you to take 2 seconds off your time that is huge. In an elite race that could be as much as 5 places. I get that it might be 4 seconds but is 2 seconds a lot for an elite 1500 runner - of course.
I think the Oregon guys are 3:53 milers, maybe 3:52. But the shoe has allowed them to run 3:50 indoor. Guaranteed there are former American milers on the indoor list scratching their heads wondering how two guys only a few years out of HS ran faster than they did their whole career.
No, I was talking about the ORGINAL victories. The ones from 2009. Spike tech is always "improving", which is why we don't run in shoes that were made in 1970. Now, is the difference between these "super shoes" and the previous shoes 2 seconds over a mile? No chance! Maybe a millisecond or two, at most.
Where are you getting your numbers from? You're just pulling them out of your a$$.
Exactly. Proponents of the ‘several seconds’ of benefit seem to not be grasping that (i) there can be some benefit that is meaningful but not nearly as great as they claim (eg 1s in 1500 vs 3.5s, which as we all know it a huge difference) and (ii) that 3.5s or 1% is completely absurd at the 1500. Here’s another test as to whether 3.5s might be realistic - so Shelby would have run 3:51 mid (or really 3:51 low given 1% of 3:54.99 is almost 4s) in Doha had she been in super spikes???????? Are you serious????? Shelby is great and who knows may have medaled if she wore what everybody else wore, but there is just no way she would have been 1% faster and run 3:51.